Intelligent Rating Systems

Ken Meyering (
Sat, 24 Jun 1995 18:29:00 -0700

Message-Id: <>
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 1995 18:29:00 -0700
To: (Kee Hinckley), Peter Deutsch <>
From: (Ken Meyering)
Subject: Intelligent Rating Systems
Cc: "Marc Salomon" <>,,

Why not a simple solution like a third level domain name called "values".

This way, every domain can have it's own "evaluation" of other domains, and
users.  Why limit the distributed "ratings" and evaluation process to
"protecting children from filth"?

Here's a suggestion:

Any domain which wishes to share its "point of view" can have a subdomain
called "values".  Simply access the the subdomain using an internet address
as a query.  These values can be positive (e.g, +32768) or negative (-32767).

For example:

      might return

   0 (neutral)


      might return

   -16000 (discouraged)

Positive means "encouraged, attract, seek, approach", and negative means
"repel, avoid, discouraged".

Priests, Pornographers, and Politicians all can have their own "value servers".

This approach wouldn't be limited to sexual content.

Of course, the word "children" above is subject to interpretation.

A more accurate system would allow a more multi-dimensional approach to
demographic classification.  For example, instead of using the word
children, you might input {age<=12, sex="F", etc.}

This way, the opinions of multiple domains could be solicited in the process
of selecting material.  And an evaluation would be more complex than simple
"Blacklisting" or "Yes/No".

Different domains could be subjectively "weighted" by parents.  These
"weights" would result in a more balanced "overall recommendation".

Ken Meyering